Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-02343
Original file (BC-2011-02343.txt) Auto-classification: Denied
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 

IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-02343 

 COUNSEL: NONE 

 HEARING DESIRED: YES 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 

 

His condition of Obstructive Sleep Apnea (OSA) be changed to 
reflect “In the Line of Duty” (ILOD) rather than “Existed Prior 
to Service (EPTS) – Line of Duty Not Applicable.” 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 

 

There is a definite correlation between pain and OSA. In 2007, 
he injured his lower back and left leg, which caused severe pain 
in his back and the beginning of his difficulties sleeping. He 
was diagnosed with bulging disks at L3, L4, and L5. He also 
suffered from a complete tear of his right bicep tendon in 2008. 

 

In support of his appeal, the applicant provides copies of his 
Informal LOD, a memorandum concerning the Reinvestigation of 
Final Determination, electronic communications, sleep study 
medical documentation, and a response to a congressional inquiry. 

 

The applicant's complete submission, with attachments, is at 
Exhibit A. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

STATEMENT OF FACTS: 

 

The applicant is currently serving in the United States Air Force 
Reserve (AFRES) in the grade of senior master sergeant (E-8). 
While serving on active duty orders from 29 November 2009 to 
6 April 2010, he was diagnosed with OSA. An Informal LOD 
determination, dated 26 April 2010, found the applicant’s 
condition of OSA as “EPTS-LOD Not Applicable.” The applicant 
exercised his right to a reinvestigation in accordance with Air 
Force Instruction 36-2910, Chapter 4, which was denied both by 
the Appointing Authority and the Approving Authority on 
24 February 2011. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

AFRC/SGP recommends denial. SGP states an LOD determination is 
based on the onset of the disease and not the manifestation of 


symptoms. Additionally, the EPTS finding is based on the period 
of service during which the symptoms manifested themselves, not 
the member’s entry into the service. This negates the 
applicant’s assertion it should be ILOD because he didn’t have 
the condition upon entering the service. He also believes Title 
10, United States Code (USC), Section 1207A; the “8-year rule” 
should apply to his case. However, this statute is for 
disability consideration and conditions that render service 
members unfit for military duty and can only be applied by the 
Physical Evaluation Board (PEB). A disability case submitted to 
the PEB would allow the appropriate authority to apply the “8-
year rule” if he was found unfit for military service. However, 
the applicant has already undergone Medical Evaluation Board 
(MEB) processing and was returned to duty on 27 January 2011. 

 

SGP indicates the applicant also feels the pain from his service-
connected orthopedic condition is the cause of OSA. While the 
pain may be the cause of another sleep disorder, it is medically 
unrelated to OSA. As noted in the two previous reviews of his 
LODs, intrinsic contributions to OSA, such as obesity and 
physiologic airway obstruction are, in the applicant’s case, 
likely a far more significant contributing factor and neither of 
these was impacted or worsened by military service. His LOD and 
re-investigation were thoroughly reviewed, processed, and ruled 
upon by the regulation designated authorities. “EPTS-LOD Not 
Applicable” was the most prudent finding in accordance with all 
laws, regulations, and policies. 

 

The complete SGP evaluation is at Exhibit C. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant 
on 4 November 2011 for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit 
D). As of this date, this office has received no response. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT: 

 

1. The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided by existing 
law or regulations. 

 

2. The application was timely filed. 

 

3. Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to 
demonstrate the existence of an error or an injustice. We took 
notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the 
merits of the case; however, we agree with the opinion and 
recommendation of the Air Force office of primary responsibility 
and adopt its rationale as the basis for our conclusion the 


applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice. 
Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no 
basis to recommend granting the relief sought in this 
application. 

 

4. The applicant's case is adequately documented and it has not 
been shown that a personal appearance with or without counsel 
will materially add to our understanding of the issues involved. 
Therefore, the request for a hearing is not favorably considered. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: 

 

The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not 
demonstrate the existence of material error or injustice; that 
the application was denied without a personal appearance; and 
that the application will only be reconsidered upon the 
submission of newly discovered relevant evidence not considered 
with this application. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket 
Number BC-2011-02343 in Executive Session on 6 March 2012, under 
the provisions of AFI 36-2603: 

 

 , Panel Chair 

 , Member 

 , Member 

 

The following documentary evidence was considered for AFBCMR 
Docket Number BC-2011-02343: 

 

Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 23 Jun 11, w/atchs. 

Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. 

Exhibit C. Letter, AFRC/SGP, not dated. 

Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 4 Nov 11. 

 

 

 

 

 

 Panel Chair 



Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-04572

    Original file (BC-2010-04572.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-04572 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: While it is not readily apparent, it appears as though the applicant is requesting that her lower back pain condition be determined to be in the line of duty (LOD). She had five such determinations completed. Therefore, in view of the AFBCMR Medical...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2007-03578

    Original file (BC-2007-03578.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The LOD was not completed and a final determination was not provided. The LOD was initiated again on 4 Apr 06 and was finalized on 17 Nov 06 with the finding of “Existed Prior to Service-LOD Not Applicable.” _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ AFRC/SGP recommends the requested relief be denied. SGP states a review of the applicant's medical records found the medical condition was addressed by the supporting reserve medical unit with...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-03777

    Original file (BC-2010-03777.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-03777 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 1. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the letters prepared by the appropriate offices of the Air Force, which are attached at Exhibits C and...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-00880

    Original file (BC-2012-00880.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Her OSA was found not in the line of duty by reason of Existed Prior to Service (EPTS) – LOD not applicable. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFRC/SG recommends denial, noting that while her diagnosis corresponds to a period of active duty, absent a mid-face tumor or trauma, OSA has an incubation period of months to years. She notes she mistakenly did not provide all the active duty orders she had been on between the Jan 07 and Nov 09...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2012 02357

    Original file (BC 2012 02357.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    ________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: Based on the available records, the applicant served on active duty, from 13 Oct 82 to 29 Oct 92 and was transferred to the Air Force Reserve. They must have eight years of active service and have been on active duty orders for more than 30 days at the time the condition became unfitting, as subsequently determined by the PEB, and meet all other requirements set forth under the law and governing Air Force...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-03633

    Original file (BC-2006-03633.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ AFRC/A1BR recommends the requested relief be denied. A complete copy of the HQ AFRC/A1BR evaluation is attached at Exhibit B. We took note of the applicant’s contentions and the documentation provided in support of his request for an In Line of Duty Determination for sleep apnea and retroactive lost participation points and time in grade for retirement from December 2004 through October 2005.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-01918

    Original file (BC-2011-01918.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ AFRC/SGP recommends denial, noting the applicant underwent two LOD determinations for his medical condition and that both were determined to be EPTS-NA. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 5 Aug 11 for review and comment within 30 days. We took notice of the...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-02590

    Original file (BC-2012-02590.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-02590 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Correct the Line of Duty (LOD) finding of existed prior to service (EPTS – LOD Not Applicable) for chronic asthmatic bronchitis and chronic sinusitis, to reflect in the line of duty (ILOD), in block 11 of the AFRC IMT 348, dated 24 September 2008. ...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-02464

    Original file (BC-2011-02464.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. Per AFI 36-2910, paragraph 3.4.1.2.3., the Eight Year Rule states “a disabling condition will be found to be in the line of duty, even though the condition existed prior to serve (EPTS), if the member has a least eight years of active service (8 years do not have to be consecutive), and the member was on active duty orders specifying a period of more than 30 days at the time the condition became unfitting, as...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-03676

    Original file (BC-2011-03676.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-03676 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her Line of Duty (LOD) determination dated 6 December 2010 be opened for reinvestigation. Neither alleged injury was reported to the Reserve Medical Unit in a timely manner in accordance with AFI 48-123, Physical Examinations and Standards, chapter...